3% Unsheltered (incl. "abandoned in hospitals," "primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings," "living in cars, parks, public spaces, abandoned buildings, substandard housing, bus or train stations.")

10% Unknown

"Doubled up" means that the family is staying with friends or relatives because they cannot afford their own place. This may not match the picture in your head of "homeless," which may accord more with the living in shelters or unsheltered. But the latter would not allow a figure of "1.5 million children." Are people in transitional housing actually homeless? It depends on what you mean by "homeless."

By the definition used by the National Center on Family Homelessness, TOF was homeless for the first five years of his life on earth, since we were staying with my mother's parents (and uncles and some cousins) two houses up the street. Pere had elected to use his GI Bill money to build a house and the Government had elected to drag its feet for as long as possible. In any case, there we were, doubled up. We did not feel especially homeless as I recollect. Not with Big Mom running the show.

But this illustrates the hazards of Counting Things. If the Definitions are elastic enough, they may include things that the reader would consider as covered. Typically, we will think of the Worst Case scenario when the definition may include many Milder Case scenarios.

In a survey of TV violence back in the 60s, special “watchers” reviewed tapes of shows and counted the number of violent incidents. That's gotta be scientificalistic! The most violent show on TV that year was…..

Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In

If that show does not strike you as especially violent, well, you may be defining violent differently than the special watchers.

ON A MORE SERIOUS NOTE
"3.9 million women living in a couple with a man were physically abused last year"
--Washington Post (15 July 1993)

This figure came from the 1993 Commonwealth Fund telephone survey of 2500 women, which used questions from the 1975/1985 Straus & Gelles Surveys, which asked respondents

In the past year, has your spouse/partner:

Insulted or swore at you

Stomped out of the room, house, etc.

Threatened to hit you/throw something

Threw, smashed, hit, or kicked something

Threw something at you

Pushed, grabbed, shoved or slapped you

Kicked, bit, or hit you with a fist or object

Beat you up

Choked you

Threatened you with a knife or gun

Used a knife or gun on you

So what counts as being "physically abused"? Being sworn at or insulted may be abusive, but it is not physically abusive. (And who is to say it is not worse to crush the spirit than the body?) But otoh, having a weapon used on you clearly is physical. So where would you draw the line and say beyond this is physical abuse, below this is not?

It's not easy. A can push B simply in passing, on the way out the door, because A's intent is to cool off before exploding in genuine violence. Or A can grab B by the arm because B is swinging a frying pan at A's head. Details can matter. It's not clear to TOF that the numbered scale is actually a scale at all. No. 5 can be more serious than #6, imho, depending on what is thrown: e.g., a spitball v. a dinner plate.

For the purpose of the survey report, the line was drawn between #5 and #6. Is that where you would have drawn it? None of the 2500 respondents reported #8 through #11. This does not mean no women suffered those degrees of abuse. It means no one in the survey reported them. Which might only mean they are sufficiently rare that a sample of 2500 did not happen to pick up any examples. 5% reported #6 and 3.4% reported #7. These added up to more than the 3.9 million mentioned in the headline, so we assume that some women reported both #6 and #7.

In any case, was #6 or #7 what you thought of when you read the phrase "were physically abused"?

Saturday, November 11, 2017

... of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918, the guns in
Europe fell silent at last. The United States built a wall inscribed
with the names of servicemen killed or missing in the nine years' war in Vietnam.
In three-and-a-half years, the Allies in WW1 suffered deaths amounting
to 103 Vietnam walls. That's just over 2.5 Vietnam walls every month.

Harry Singley, TOF's grandfather
"Guv"

Today is the 99th anniversary of the Armistice, an event nearly forgotten today. A letter written by Sgt. Harry
Singley, 304th Engineers, describes the day:

First day of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive
26 Sept. 1918

"It was on Sept. 26 when the big drive started in the
Argonne Forest and I saw all kinds of things that I never witnessed
before. We started out on the night of the 25th. At 9 o'clock we
commenced a tank road and worked our way almost to the German's front
line trenches. At 2:30 one of the greatest of all barrages was opened.
It was said that between 3500 and 4000 guns, some of them of very large
calibre, went off at that hour just like clock work. We worked on this
road under shell fire until about 3:45 and then went back until the
infantry went over the top at 5 o'clock. We followed with the tanks.
That is the way the Americans started and kept pounding and pushing
ahead until the great day on Nov. 11. ...

Harry Singley, 304th Engineers,
Rainbow Division

It was some life. I am proud that I went through
it, for nobody on the Hill [i.e., Fountain Hill, PA] will have anything on me... I was a little
with sneezing or tear gas. It made me sick but I remained with the
company for I did not like to leave my detachment at any time for if
something would happen, I thought, there would be plenty of help. I
felt much better in a few days. A small piece of shrapnel splinter hit
me below the knee. Otherwise I was lucky. ..."

"Somebody will wake up soon when the boys get back to the States..."

General Order General Headquarters, A. E. F.

No. 203 France, November 12, 1918

The enemy has capitulated. It is fitting that I address myself in
thanks directly to the officers and soldiers of the American
Expeditionary Forces, who by their heroic efforts have made possible
this glorious result.

Our Armies, hurriedly raised and hastily trained, met a veteran enemy,
and by courage, discipline and skill always defeated him. Without
complaint you have endured incessant toil, privation and danger. You
have seen many of your comrades make the Supreme Sacrifice that freedom
may live.

I thank you for your patience and courage with which you have endured.
I congratulate you upon the splendid fruits of victory, which your
heroism and the blood of our gallant dead are now presenting to our
nation. Your deeds will live forever on the most glorious pages of
America's history.

Those things you have done. There remains now a harder task which will
test your soldierly qualities to the utmost. Success in this and little
note will be taken and few praises sung; fail, and the light of your
glorious achievements of the past will be sadly dimmed.

But you will not fail. Every natural tendency may urge towards
relaxation in discipline, in conduct, in appearance, in everything that
marks the soldier. Yet you will remember that each officer and EACH
SOLDIER IS THE REPRESENTATIVE IN EUROPE OF HIS PEOPLE and that his
brilliant deeds of yesterday permit no action of today to pass
unnoticed by friend or foe.

You will meet this test as gallantly as you met the test of the
battlefield. Sustained by your high ideals and inspired by the heroic
part you have played, you will carry back to your people the proud
consciousness of a new Americanism born of sacrifice.

Whether you stand on hostile territory or the friendly soil of France,
you will bear yourself IN DISCIPLINE, APPEARANCE AND RESPECT FOR ALL
CIVIL RIGHTS THAT YOU WILL CONFIRM FOR ALL TIME THE PRIDE AND LOVE
WHICH EVERY AMERICAN FEELS FOR YOUR UNIFORM AND FOR YOU.

John J. Pershing,
General, Commander-in-Chief.

Reconciliation
by Siegfried Sassoon

When you are standing at your hero's grave,
Or near some homeless village where he died,
Remember, through your heart's rekindling pride,
The German soldiers who were loyal and brave.

Men fought like brutes; and hideous things were done:
And you have nourished hatred, harsh and blind.
But in that Golgotha perhaps you'll find
The mothers of the men who killed your son.

November, 1918.

h/t Brandon Watson

TECHNICALLY,
it was only an armistice, and 21 years later, they had to do it all
over again; this time with massive civilian casualties. In between, as our friend Fabio pointed out once before, more people were killed in battle than in the years of the Great War itself. Think only of the Reds and Whites in Russia, of the Greeks and Turks in Anatolia, of the Polish-Soviet conflict, and a host of smaller conflicts, such as in Ireland.

Since then, Armistice Day has been expanded to include all veterans of all
wars. As he has generally done on Veteran's day, TOF appends here a short
account of veterans in my own and in the Incomparable Marge's families.

TOF himself is not a veteran. The
closest he got was two years of Artillery ROTC in which he achieved the alleged rank of staff sergeant (so he
knows how to call down fire on your location. You have been warned.) But he
was
classified 4F by a wise military. This was at the height of the Vietnam
War, toward which TOF had expressed opposition, though unlike other opponents,
it was LBJ's inept micromanagement that irritated him, along with Sec. McNamara's weird obsession with corporate-like numbers
crunching. He never imagined, as others did, that the victory of Ho Chi Minh would be rainbows and fluffy bunnies, rather than re-education camps and boat people.

Ballad of the Artillery ROTC

They made him a second lieutenantThey gave him two bars made of gold.They made him a forward observer.He lived to be ten seconds old.

ChorusAy-yi-yi-yiiiYour mother swims after troop ships.So let's have another verseThat's worse than any other verseAnd waltz me around again, Willie.

Friday, November 10, 2017

Factoids on Parade!

"Food inflation hit an 18-year high in April [2008], with grocery prices rising 1.5 percent for the month, the government said Wednesday. Prices rose in every aisle--dairy, breads, meats, beverages, fruits and vegetables. It means $53 more a month to feed a family of four with a typical food budget."

Read it and be afraid. Be very afraid. The barbarians are already inside the gates.

+++

I recollect one time when as a graduate assistant at Marquette, I had an office with two other TAs on the second floor of what was then the Math building and is now not there at all. Three other TAs had the office next to us. The rest of the math department was on the third floor, where they needn't associate with us peasants. The remainder of the 2nd floor was given over to something called the Education Department.

One day, we math grads fell into discussion with one of the Education professors regarding the New Math, in which little kids were being taught abstract set theory. At one point we objected that not even the teachers understood such abstractions. "The teacher does not need to understand the material," the professor of education insisted. "He only needs to understand how to teach the material."

All hail Common Core, where a kid can be marked wrong for showing that 5x3=15 because 5+5+5=15 rather than 3+3+3+3+3=15 as the syllabus says!

Wednesday, November 8, 2017

THE THOUGHT-CLICHE of "Fake News" (which TOF will endeavor to spell "Fake News [sic]" at least until he tires of doing so) which was launched by the old-school dish-it-out media has faded somewhat as the old-school media discovered it bounding back on them like eager little puppy dogs.

Most ironic of all ... was the outcry against "fake news,"
said to be fostered and encouraged by their upstart rivals in the social
media, possibly with the assistance of Russian or Macedonian hackers
(experts said) plying gullible Trump supporters with disinformation (or
accurate but purloined information) tending to the disadvantage of Mrs
Clinton. Worst of all, these dark, clandestine forces were causing a
drop in readership and in newspaper advertising revenue and so
endangering the livelihood of proper journalists, like the criers-out.
"The internet-borne forces that are eating away at print advertising are enabling a host of faux-journalistic players to pollute the democracy with dangerously fake news items," thundered Jim Rutenberg of The New York Times on the day before the election.

The first example to pass before TOF's optics was one played on the network news regarding a pizza parlor in Washington DC said to host a satanic child pornography ring run by DNC officials, identified by no less reliable a source than a guy in his pajamas in his mother's basement: i.e., a blogger. This so evidently inspired a bloggee that he went there with a rifle to "self-investigate the claims." At least no one did so wretched a thing back when the mainstream media was propagating similarly bootless calumnies -- quoting real-life officials who self-investigated -- about satanic day-care centers. They used firearms and juries to clap innocent people in jail. Satanic child-care is always a winner in stirring folks up, whether it is a blogger or a district attorney who does the stirring.

Thursday, November 2, 2017

This was a post originally appearing on the Auld Blogge lo! these many years ago. I had thought it reposted here, but I cannot find it and so I am doing so now.

ET in the Middle Ages

It
has long been held that the medievals would have been terrified of
aliens, regarded them as "demons," and otherwise persecuted them in
their religious ignorance and fanaticism, while we wise moderns would
recognize them as intelligent and equivalent to humans, deserving of the
same consideration as humans. The latter is a self-flattering mythos,
but likely no more true than the former.

For illumination, we might turn to the well-known SF novel, Eifelheim,
but this too may be regarded as self-flattering. Besides, I have it on
good authority that the author made it all up; so it can be seen as
begging the question.

In his Encyclopedia, Pliny quotes from Megasthenes’ Indica regarding alien creatures living in India:

Megasthenes
writes that on different mountains in India there are tribes of men
with dog shaped heads, armed with claws, clothed with skins, who speak
not in the accents of human language, but only bark and have fierce
grinning jaws.....Those who live near the source of the Ganges,
requiring nothing in the shape of food, subsist on the odour of wild
apples, and when they go on a long journey, they carry these with them
for safety of their life by inhaling their perfume..Should they inhale
air, death is inevitable

The
Dog-Heads were not the only aliens the medievals believed in. There
were also the Monopods, the cyclops, the centaurs, men with eyes in
their torsos, full hermpaphrodites, and so on.

‘In
the mountains dwell men who have the head of a dog; they wear skins of
wild beasts as clothing, and they speak no language, but bark like dogs,
and in this way understand one another’s speech. They have teeth bigger
than a dog’s...they understand the speech of the Indians, but cannot
respond to them; instead they bark and signal with their hands and
fingers, as do mutes’.

‘All
of them, men and women, have a tail above their hips, like a dog’s
except bigger and smoother. They have intercourse with their wives on
all fours like dogs, and consider any other form of intercourse to be
shameful. They are just, and the longest lived of any human race; for
they get to be 160, sometimes 200 years of age’.

The existence of alien beings became popular in the medieval period. Sometimes they were used to frighten people (a la The Blob or Earth Versus the Flying Saucers) and sometimes they were used to illustrate virtues (ET: The Extraterrestrial) or vices (the Ferengi in ST:The Next Generation). According to a Welsh poem, King Arthur fought with the creatures:

‘On the mountain of Edinburgh; He fought with dog-heads; By the Hundred they fell’

‘Now this Christopher was one of the Dogheads,
a race that had the heads of dogs and ate human flesh. He meditated
much on God, but at that time he could speak only the language of the
Dogheads. When he saw how much the Christians suffered he was indignant
and left the city. He began to adore God and prayed. "Almighty God," he
said, "give me the gift of speech, open my mouth, and make plain thy
might that those who persecute thy people may be converted". An angel of
God came to him and said: "God has heard your prayer."The angel raised
Christopher from the ground, and struck and blew upon his mouth, and the
grace of eloquence was given him as he had desired.’

St Christopher was baptized and abjured his erstwhile human-eating. As a result he gained human appearance before getting martyred. Pay attention to that last: As a result of baptism, he "gained human appearance."

A 9th century churchman called Rimbert
- later archbishop of Hamburg-Bremen – was planning to leave on a
missionary journey to the northern reaches of Scandinavia. To prepare
for his journey he wrote to Ratramnus,
a monk of Corbie in Picardy, asking for information regarding the
dog-heads, whom he thought he might encounter. According to a dossier
Rimbert had put together, the dog-heads lived in villages, practised
agriculture and domesticated animals. In response Ratramnus wrote his Epistola de Cynocephalis
addressing the question of whether the dog-heads were "worthy of
evangelism." The issue hinged on whether the mysterious creatures could
be considered rational. (You may recall that in Eifelheim,
Dietrich has a similar conversation with his old teacher Willi, a canon
of Freiburg. If you don't recall this, that means you have not read
the book, and you should rectify this error immediately and without
hesitation.)

Ratramnus begins by describing the Dog-Heads' manner of speaking:

the
form of their heads and their canine barking shows that they are
similar not to humans but to animals. In fact, the heads of humans are
on top and round in order for them to see the heavens, while those of
dogs are long and drawn out in a snout so that they can look at the
ground. And humans speak, while dogs bark.

And yet, "despite their appearance," Rimbert's information clearly depicts them as capable of domesticating animals.

‘I do not see’wrote Ratramnus,‘how this could be so if they had an animal and not a rational soul’ since
the living things of the earth were subjected to men by heaven, as we
know from having read Genesis. But it has never been heard or believed
that animals of one kind can by themselves take care of other animals,
especially those of a domestic kind, keep them, compel them to submit to
their rule, and follow regular routines.

Ratramnus pointed to the way in which the dog-heads ‘keep the rules of society’and recognised the rule of law. ‘There cannot be any law, which common assent has not decreed. But such cannot be established or kept without the discipline of morality’. Unlike
Ctesias’s dog-heads, Rimbert’s report stated that they covered their
genitalia. Ratramnus interpreted this as a sign of decency and these and
others attributes convinced him they were human; in any case, St Christopher had once been one and converted. Hence, Ratramnus concluded that the dog-heads were degenerated descendants of Adam, although
the Church generally classed them with beasts. They may even receive
baptism by being rained upon. Here Ratramnus was following in the
footsteps of Augustine of Hippo,
who had written that if the monstrous races did exist, they were created
according to God’s will and, if they are human and descended from Adam,
they must be capable of salvation. This would extend the
Church's missionary obligation to the farthest flung parts of the earth
and make ‘monstrous missionizing’ a necessary fulfillment of Christ’s
charge.

Before we chuckle too much at medieval beliefs, keep in
mind that their cosmology impeded their ability to think of these aliens
as living on other planets, where we sophisticated moderns imagine our
own "dog-heads" to dwell. At least the medievals had "travelers' tales"
to fall back on. They could reasonably believe that someone had been
"out there" and brought back reports. And they never suffered from the
defect of thinking that allowed moderns to seriously debate whether
Africans or Amerinds had souls or even (after Darwinism had informed the
discourse) whether they were of the same species. Which
brings us back to "St Christopher the Dog-Head." Why was it that no
one seemed to be any more outraged that a Dog-Head could be baptized
and become a saint than that, say, a Krenk in Eifelheim could be so?
The key is that: As a result of baptism, he gained human appearance. Church
doctrine was that the soul was the substantive form of the human body.
And the soul of a human was defined as a "rational soul," one
possessing intellect [abstract reasoning] and will [appetite/desire for
abstract concepts]. This is the "human form" or appearance, the "image"
in which humans were said to have been made. Thus, while there was a
clear distinction between humans and other animals, this was based on
rationality. Any race of creatures which displayed rationality -- as
the Dog-Heads did in keeping a code of laws, showing dominion over other
animals, etc. -- would be regarded as the equivalent of human beings.
In consequence, Church teaching has not changed in this regard, as
Brother Guy, the Vatican astronomer, points out in this article: Would You Baptize An Extraterrestrial?

The
Franciscan friar, John de Marignollis traveled to the Far East in the
1330s and, in the spirit of true medieval empiricism, looked for "the
monstrous races the ancients had spoken of." He asked the Indians about
the existence of the dog-heads. They answered, ‘we thought they lived where you came from’. (p. 106) books.google.com/books

Alas,
like today's aliens from other planets, the Dog-Heads always seem to
live "somewhere else." I did not know the story of "St. Christopher the
Dog-Head" or Ratramnus' reply to Rimbert when I wrote the original
"Eifelheim," but there is a certain uncanny
similarity in the stories.

Augustine and the Dog-Heads

Augustine discusses the dog-heads, as well as other monstrous races, in The City of God, Book. 16, Chap. 8.And he writes just as you would expect one of those religious nuts to write:

Whether Certain Monstrous Races of Men are Derived from the Stock of Adam or Noah's Sons.

Medieval Aliens

It
is also asked whether we are to believe that certain monstrous races of
men, spoken of in secular history, have sprung from Noah's sons, or
rather, I should say, from that one man from whom they themselves were
descended. For it is reported that some have one eye in the middle of
the forehead; some, feet turned backwards from the heel; some, a double
sex, the right breast like a man, the left like a woman, and that they
alternately beget and bring forth: others are said to have no mouth, and
to breathe only through the nostrils; others are but a cubit high, and
are therefore called by the Greeks Pigmies: they say that in
some places the woman conceive in their fifth year, and do not live
beyond their eighth. So, too, they tell of a race who have two feet but
only one leg, and are of marvelous swiftness, though they do not bend
the knee: they are called Skiopodes, because in the hot weather they lie
down on their backs and shade themselves with their feet. Others are
said to have no head, and their eyes in their shoulders; and other human
or quasi-human races are depicted in mosaic in the harbor esplanade of
Carthage, on the faith of histories of rarities. What shall I say of the Cynocephali, whose dog-like head and barking proclaim them beasts rather than men? But we are not bound to believe all we hear of these monstrosities. But whoever is anywhere born a man, that is, a rational, mortal animal, no matter what unusual appearance he presents in color,
movement, sound, nor how peculiar he is in some power, part, or quality
of his nature, no Christian can doubt that he springs from that one
protoplast. We can distinguish the common human nature from that which
is peculiar, and therefore wonderful.

Too bad the
Cartesians began by denying there was such a thing as a single human
nature. We could have saved ourselves a lot of trouble wooling over things like skin color.

Augustine
then goes on to give reasons for his statement; viz., that of monstrous
births among the known races, including one remarkable fellow that he
remembered from his youth: "Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a
man was born in the East, double in his upper, but single in his lower
half — having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two
feet like an ordinary man; and he lived so long that many had an
opportunity of seeing him."

The
same account which is given of monstrous births in individual cases can
be given of monstrous races. For God, the Creator of all, knows where
and when each thing ought to be, or to have been created, because He
sees the similarities and diversities which can contribute to the beauty
of the whole. But He who cannot see the whole is offended by the
deformity of the part, because he is blind to that which balances it,
and to which it belongs. We know that men are born with more than four
fingers on their hands or toes on their feet: this is a smaller matter;
but far from us be the folly of supposing that the Creator mistook the
number of a man's fingers, though we cannot account for the difference.
And so in cases where the divergence from the rule is greater. He whose
works no man justly finds fault with, knows what He has done. At
Hippo-Diarrhytus there is a man whose hands are crescent-shaped, and
have only two fingers each, and his feet similarly formed. If there were
a race like him, it would be added to the history of the curious and
wonderful. Shall we therefore deny that this man is descended from that
one man who was first created? As for the Androgyni, or Hermaphrodites,
as they are called, though they are rare, yet from time to time there
appears persons of sex so doubtful, that it remains uncertain from which
sex they take their name; though it is customary to give them a
masculine name, as the more worthy. For no one ever called them
Hermaphroditesses. Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was
born in the East, double in his upper, but single in his lower half —
having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like
an ordinary man; and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of
seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have
differed widely from their ascertained parents? As, therefore, no one
will deny that these are all descended from that one man, so all the
races which are reported to have diverged in bodily appearance from the
usual course which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if
they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal
animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of
all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from
one another and from us to be true; but possibly they are not: for if
we were not aware that apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but
beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men,
and flaunt with impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries. But
supposing they are men of whom these marvels are recorded, what if God
has seen fit to create some races in this way, that we might not suppose
that the monstrous births which appear among ourselves are the failures
of that wisdom whereby He fashions the human nature, as we speak of the
failure of a less perfect workman? Accordingly, it ought not to seem
absurd to us, that as in individual races there are monstrous births, so
in the whole race there are monstrous races. Wherefore, to conclude
this question cautiously and guardedly, either these things which have
been told of some races have no existence at all; or if they do exist,
they are not human races; or if they are human, they are descended from
Adam.

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Reposted from last year for this time of year. Some additions since original post.

Students terrified that others might hear a contrary opinion

ONE OF the shibboleths of Late Modern thought is something called
'diversity.' It is supposedly to be treasured, but actually it is
applied only in certain contexts. No one wants diversity in a Big Mac.
The last thing you want when biting the big bun is a big surprise, inasmuch
as such a surprise is more than likely to be unpleasant. In other cases,
we find a lack of enthusiasm for diversity of speech on campus, where
disfavored speakers are shut down or shouted out by people chanting
uniform (i.e., non-diverse)
three-word slogans. Diverse speech is likewise likely to be unpleasant
or at least unwelcome. The same applies to diversity in the DNA code.
Without consistency, there is no species and no formal cause of
evolution. Most mutations kill the organism.

AND YET... Without diversity in the genome there is nothing for natural selection to chew on. It is the material cause of evolution. Diversity enters too between
kinds of things: the same outlet that offers the Big Mac also offers
chicken breast sandwiches, cheeseburgers, nuggets, and a diversity of
other kinds. And if diversity within a species is iffy, diversity between
species is another matter. Aquinas held that the multiplication of
species across time and geography was a way in which creation
participated in the infinity of the Creator.

Today
being All Saints, we celebrate the single most diverse assemblage on
Earth: to wit, the Communion of Saints. It includes peasants [St. Joan of Arc]
as well as emperors and empresses [Sts. Heinrich II and Kunigunde]. They are 12 years old [Maria Goretti] and 86 years old [Polycarp of Smyrna]. They include schoolteachers [Jean Baptiste de la Salle] and highwaymen
[Moses the Black]. They are been martyrs [Habib the Martyr], musicians
[Ephraem of Syria], and mystics [Hildegarde of Bingen]. They have come
from every people on the face of the earth.

Naturally, this Church must
be celebrated by the champions of diversity....

A sampling across time and space:

Habib the Martyr

Jews: Joseph of Palestine, Pope Zozimus, Romanus the Melodist, Daniel of Padua, Julian of Toledo, Edith Stein of Dachau, etc.Syrians:Habib the Martyr, John of Damascus, Pope John V

A: Jesus said, “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, teaching them all that I have commanded you.”
℟:
And there before me was a great multitude which no one could count,
from every nation, race, people, and tongue, standing before the throne
and before the Lamb.